Mary: On 3/4/13 6:51 PM, Mary Barnes wrote: > [MB] I don't think anyone has said an AD could be a manager with > little technical clue. I think Sam said it extremely well in his > email. What some of us have been proposing is that someone with > proven technical skills in another area that also is good at managing > projects/people could do a reasonable job. From what I have seen this > has certainly been the case in other areas - i.e., ADs that don't have > depth of knowledge in all the WGs in their areas, but are strong > technical individuals in other areas. > I am very sorry to have to say this, but we are all dancing around the issue that we have experience of where the above has been shown to simply not work well. And this is why it is important for a NOMCOM that gets into such a situation to do exactly what this NOMCOM did: consult with the IESG to determine the need to "have a body" versus have the right person. > The problem seems to be that > folks value the technical expertise far more than they do project and > people management skills. The end result is that there are some > really strong technical people in leadership roles that have little > ability to manage things well and very poor people interaction skills. > The latter is certainly a very negative personality trait when it > comes to motivating and managing volunteers. [/MB] That happens from time to time, let's agree. And maybe it is the price we pay for the model we have. And maybe that's a trade-off worth having. This is not to say that the IESG shouldn't evolve its working methods, by the way. But it is possible to get it wrong. Eliot